Exploring the relationship between linguistic knowledge and strategy use in listening comprehension

Abstract

The language learner strategies research field has often tried to identify the good language learner (GLL) by distinguishing more proficient from less proficient learners. However the notion of ‘good’ may be problematic without taking into account an individual’s linguistic knowledge (LK). This article foregrounds LK in relation to strategy use in the context of ‘listening to the teacher’: a language use task relatively under-researched. Secondary school students in Hong Kong ( n = 646) completed a questionnaire and tests of LK including vocabulary and grammar. Lower LK learners reported using more translation strategies, whereas those with higher LK reported using a range of additional strategies. A further cluster analysis, however, indicated that a sub-group of lower LK learners were comparably strategic with the higher LK group perhaps compensating for low LK via strategy deployment. This article provides evidence that strategy deployment when listening to the teacher is not wholly constrained by levels of LK. Pedagogical implications are suggested.

Individual Style Of Language Learners' Listening Ability In The Context Of Intercultural Communication

“…linguistic: the repertoire of compensation strategies and skills is determined by the number and depth of the student's linguistic tools (lexical, grammatical, phonetic, phonological) (Fung & Macaro, 2019); the more this set is and the stronger the skills of operating with linguistic units, the more productive the style of listening comprehension is, the more quickly linguistic strategies and skills of compensating for incomprehensible and bridging gaps in the comprehension of sounding speech work;…”

Navigating the Challenges of L2 Reading: Self‐Efficacy, Self‐Regulatory Reading Strategies, and Learner Profiles

“…We used this combined measure of LK because, for the current article, our focus was more on the relationship between self‐efficacy and TERRS when LK as a whole was accounted for rather than on the impact of our interventions on different aspects of LK, which was the focus of the original study (Woore et al., 2018). We also followed the approach of Fung & Macaro (2019) in using a composite measure of LK, albeit substituting phonological decoding for grammatical knowledge, given the importance of decoding for early L2 reading (Grabe & Jiang, 2013).…”

“…For example, cluster analysis is useful where "there is evidence to suggest that different subgroups of learners may utilize different pathways to language learning" (Staples & Biber, 2015, p. 244). Using that approach in a study of listening comprehension, Fung and Macaro (2019), for example, found that among 646 high-school English-as-a-foreignlanguage learners in Hong Kong, there was a cluster of learners with low levels of LK (vocabulary and grammar) but with levels of listening-strategy use comparable to that of some learners with high LK. The authors concluded that some learners compensate for low LK by being more 'strategic.'…”

“…Nor is the relationship between strategy use and other variables such as language proficiency always a linear one (Fung & Macaro, 2019). Thus, analyses other than correlation might shed greater light on how different IDs come together in different groups of learners.…”

“…244). Using that approach in a study of listening comprehension, Fung and Macaro (2019), for example, found that among 646 high‐school English‐as‐a‐foreign‐language learners in Hong Kong, there was a cluster of learners with low levels of LK (vocabulary and grammar) but with levels of listening‐strategy use comparable to that of some learners with high LK. The authors concluded that some learners compensate for low LK by being more ‘strategic.’ Similarly, Yun et al.…”